You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Perhaps. There are certainly physiological differences, as well as other statistically documented differences, some of which result from socialization rather than physiology. Even so, they are real in the moment, and must be acknowledged. My point is that the existence of statistical differences should never be used as a justification for dictating individual behavior. The minute one generalizes to "women should do A and men should do B" one is doing exactly that.

The OP was rather objective. I happen to be fond of the strong loner type that acquires the girl at the end, I suppose....

I wouldn't use MBTI for hard science either but It's more or a shared vocabulary, since we both understand what the INTP or ESFJ personality is without me having to type a lengthy description.

If our brains are formed differently and this controls personality/thoughts/actions what accounts for the instances where a man has more in common with a woman than another man. I used the example before of choosing which of the following three people is not like the other. Glen Beck, Sarah Palin and Andy worhol.

I won't argue against the ideas that our brains are different but I just don't see any evidence that this results in completely gendered thought/behavior. Even if male and female brains use different routes can they not come to the same conclusions?

I also think that the idea of the gravity of "gender neutrality" is overhyped.

I don't see so much gender neutrality as gender fluidity: letting each person follow their own desires and inclinations, limited only by their actual abilities and motivation. People are not sexist for recognizing facts, only for drawing conclusions that those facts do not support. I agree that the quote in the OP is romanticised. I prefer the greater realism of modern perspectives.

Originally Posted by jontherobot

The OP was rather objective. I happen to be fond of the strong loner type that acquires the girl at the end, I suppose....

I can certainly sympathize, tending to be a loner myself.

I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

I wouldn't use MBTI for hard science either but It's more or a shared vocabulary, since we both understand what the INTP or ESFJ personality is without me having to type a lengthy description.

If our brains are formed differently and this controls personality/thoughts/actions what accounts for the instances where a man has more in common with a woman than another man. I used the example before of choosing which of the following three people is not like the other. Glen Beck, Sarah Palin and Andy worhol.

I won't argue against the ideas that our brains are different but I just don't see any evidence that this results in completely gendered thought/behavior. Even if male and female brains use different routes can they not come to the same conclusions?

I also think that the idea of the gravity of "gender neutrality" is overhyped.

Yeah, I just can't think of any types I would necessarily prescribe to any gender. I believe Jung stated INFP's were more typical in the female species, though that may have been disproven since he was around.

The simple fact of being perceived as having a vagina versus a penis will result in different psychological thought processes, imo... just as saying someone not having a right hand or an albino would have differing thought process regarding many situations. Hopefully you can draw from the analogy I am trying to provide. Coriolis touched on the subject of 'gender neutrality' below, which I will address in my next post.

Remember what we were talking about earlier? This is exactly why it applies. Also I'd say psychology doesn't directly mesh with genetics 1:1. People are not robots.

There still probably would be overlap because MBTI is a generally constructed social gauge. (it's not genetics, and I daresay, it's not science)

How is it a bivalent pitfall? He's suggesting that differences in the brain causes psychological differences between genders. If this were true all women, with their similarly structured brains would have the same psychological traits.

Forget MBTI, I was just using because I assumed we were all familiar with the idea. How about this instead. If men and women are hard wired to think differently why is it that some women are very analytical and other women are not. Why is it that some men value emotional expression and other do not.

I don't see so much gender neutrality as gender fluidity: letting each person follow their own desires and inclinations, limited only by their actual abilities and motivation. People are not sexist for recognizing facts, only for drawing conclusions that those facts do not support. I agree that the quote in the OP is romanticised. I prefer the greater realism of modern perspectives.

I can certainly sympathize, tending to be a loner myself.

A friend of mine and I were just discussing that the other night, allowing one to grow to what they want to be instead of what society says they should be.

The main area we were having trouble reconciling was to what extent you give choice. I would paint a boys walls blue, but probably not pink, (unless he asked, I'm assuming all of these situations as very young children). I would paint a girl's walls probably a more 'girly' color, blue would work but maybe my wife is fond of yellow? I don't know. What toys do you buy them? Do you buy boys GI Joes and females Barbies before they even have the capability to 'choose', or is that prescribing them to what society says they should play with?

My friend I was talking with (female) said it's unfair girls don't get to play with Lego's. She said her parents never bought them for her. I asked her if she ever asked for them.... she hadn't. Did society fail her, or was it not in her natural inclination to play with Lego's? Who knows?

It's all very complex, IMO, and I have only recently begun to think about it.

How is it a bivalent pitfall? He's suggesting that differences in the brain causes psychological differences between genders. If this were true all women, with their similarly structured brains would have the same psychological traits.

Remember that important word that you missed a while back? 'Tends'? Remember how it took a sentence that wasn't true, and made it true?
This is another place where we need to use that word.

Forget MBTI, I was just using because I assumed we were all familiar with the idea. How about this instead. If men and women are hard wired to think differently why is it that some women are very analytical and other women are not. Why is it that some men value emotional expression and other do not.

Tendency. That important word 'tends'.

See why bivalence is a problem? Something can't 'tend' to be when you have a bivalent structure. It leads to black and white thinking.

Yeah, I just can't think of any types I would necessarily prescribe to any gender. I believe Jung stated INFP's were more typical in the female species, though that may have been disproven since he was around.

The simple fact of being perceived as having a vagina versus a penis will result in different psychological thought processes, imo... just as saying someone not having a right hand or an albino would have differing thought process regarding many situations. Hopefully you can draw from the analogy I am trying to provide. Coriolis touched on the subject of 'gender neutrality' below, which I will address in my next post.

Your saying that being a woman in a woman's body makes that person more aware of things relating to women? (and of course the same for males)
I'd agree with that but that seems more like a "nurture" type of situation where multiple women could have multiple responses based on differences between their bodies. i.e taller women, weaker women, blind women ect. So I would think it would still be inappropriate to expect them to experience their gender the same way.